Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- The quality of the operator that you contact with a 911 call varies greatly. Some departments start their officers as dispatchers, so that they understand what is happening on the other end of the line; in some jurisdictions, the job is a political plum to be awarded; in others the position is a heavily protected union job. In many departments, the person answering the 911 call is a dispatcher; in others there are separate operators that hand the call to dispatchers. In all cases, the operator or dispatcher is not there with you; they do not know what you know, and they do not face the danger that you face. All 911 calls are recorded, so know that everything that you say during a call, or that is caught by a phone mike, can and will be used both for and against you in a court of law.

Operator suggestions given over the phone are not commands backed up by the force of law. People often misunderstand this, as was seen in the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman case, where many people claimed that Zimmerman did not obey police “orders”. That was never the case. A dispatcher/operator does not give orders; and Zimmerman appears to have done what he was asked.

There have been many cases of dispatchers/operators giving bad advice. Many times an armed victim has been asked to “put down the gun” in the face of a deadly threat. In a recent case in Texas, an armed citizen was told to do exactly that. From click2houston.com:

“I grabbed my firearm and took after them and when I caught up to them I told them to get down,” he said. “I shot one round into the ground… to show them I wasn’t carrying a BB gun.”

Meeks said while holding two of the three teens at bay with his gun drawn, he dialed 911, but when he told the 911 operator he had a gun on the kids, the operator told him to put the gun down. Meeks said when he did, one of the two teens bolted off.

In this case, no one was hurt by the “warning shot”. I have known of cases where armed citizens fired shots to inform antagonists that what they carried was a real gun. I generally advise against “warning shots”, but there are exeptions to every policy.

The lesson to be learned from this case is not to accept the dispatcher/operator suggestions as commands. When the armed homeowner put down his gun, one of the burglary suspects ran off. He could as easily have attacked the homeowner and attempted to access the firearm. That suspect was captured by police; a third suspect is at large at the time of this writing.

Finally.A happy ending.With one sad note.The 911 operator being an untrained idiot.You got the bad guys under gun point?Well put the gun down,so they can all run off,or pull out their gun and kill you.Really?

Remember, operator/dispatchers are not there with you. Their suggestions do not have the force of law. They may have valuable information and/or advice, but it is up to you, the person at the scene, to use it wisely.
c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- With support for Constitutional Carry gaining momentum in a manner reminiscent of the way concealed carry gained momentum before sweeping the country in the 1990s, The Washington Post (WaPo) has resorted to trying to stir up enough panic to get numerous state legislatures to abandon the idea.

Constitutional Carry is open carry and concealed carry without a permit. It exists in Alaska, Arizona, Montana, Vermont, and Wyoming.

It is currently working its way through state legislatures in Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, New Hampshire, and West Virginia. Open carry without a permit is legal in these states, and legislators in each argue that allowing open carry with no permit yet requiring a permit for concealed carry is really a way of punishing —or criminalizing— citizens who carry concealed.

Some of the legislators have been even more pointed in their arguments for Constitutional Carry, making it clear that the 2nd Amendment itself is all the justification a citizen should need for carrying a gun openly or concealed.

Previously reported, West Virginia Senator Robert Kames (R-Upshur) pointed out that bearing arms “is a United States constitutional right.” He said, “The 2nd Amendment recognizes this inherent right.”

So WaPo is left with no recourse except to warn of the dangers of allowing Americans to exercise this inherent right—the danger of allowing them to bear the arms they keep without infringement. To that end, WaPo warns that Constitutional Carry means Americans will carry guns without checking in with the government first, without going through gun classes, safety courses, or background checks.

In saying these things, WaPo misses the fact that the ultimate purpose of many concealed carry permit classes around the country isn’t to make the citizen a better shot or more adept at drawing and shooting a gun to begin with.

Rather, the purpose is to lecture them on state laws regarding lethal use of force, thereby absolving the state of liability in a licensing situation.

But Constitutional Carry is another way to absolve the state of liability —it is perhaps the best way— for it makes responsibility and liability a personal matter once again.

At the same time, it gets the government out of the process so residents in Constitutional Carry states can enjoy freedom in all its fullness once more.

Allentown, PA – -(Ammoland.com)- In An Exclusive NRA News Cam & Co Interview, John Annoni the founder of Camp Compass and 2 Million Bullets shared his perspective on urban minority youth and guns.

Camp Compass is a program, founded in 1994, that brings urban students over time to the outdoors, hunting, shooting and fishing. John and his son Landon respond to reported comments made by gun control advocate Michael Bloomberg while speaking at the Aspen Institute. Bloomberg is reported to have said that cities must take away firearms from all young minority males, in order to reduce violent crime.

As a young minority male, Landon provides his perspective on firearms safety, and talks about hunting and shooting. Originally aired on NRA News Cam & Co 02/10/15.

The video which can be seen here, http://tiny.cc/ywqxux, brings a trueness to the gun debate and a perspective that the pro gun side has been in need of.

It becomes clear that moving towards solving anti firearm issues starts with passionate people who not only talk the talk but walk the walk.

ABOUT JOHN F. ANNONI:
John Annoni is the CEO and Founder of the Camp Compass Academy and a 6th grade urban middle school teacher. He received an honor from Outdoor Life Magazine heralding him as one of the top twenty-five men and women who are changing the face of hunting and fishing. John also founded 2 Million Bullets( a national orange ribbon campaign for the shooting sports) and has been featured on the NBC Nightly News segment MAKING A DIFFERENCE .

Teaxs - -(Ammoland.com)- Companies like to pile on Defense Distributed, like we don’t all know how this story ends.

The most recent is a company called Mark Forged in Cambridge that sells a carbon fiber 3D printer called the Mark One.

I ordered and paid for this printer a year ago and waited that long for them to decide they didn’t want to sell it to me after all.

Before the weekend they returned the money and told me due to “business risks” they wouldn’t sell it to me. Now Wired has the story and the company has invented some new terms of use to preclude DD from using the device at all.

Yet another of our bad faith dealings with White Liberals for NATO…

But in all seriousness, I’m going to get this printer. And, as I told them, I’m going to print a gun with it.

These hurried attempts by almost everyone in polite society to impede my company in its purpose are efforts of last resort. Last hope attempts at diverting this world from its final conditions.

I will pay $15,000 to the first person who can get me the Mark One printer.

Email me at crw(at)defdist.org if you can help.

Cody Wilson

About Defense Distributed
The specific purposes for which this corporation is organized are: To defend the civil liberty of popular access to arms as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and affirmed by the United States Supreme Court, through facilitating global access to, and the collaborative production of, information and knowledge related to the 3D printing of arms; and to publish and distribute, at no cost to the public, such information and knowledge in promotion of the public interest. Visit; www.defensedistributed.com

Bellevue, WA -(Ammoland.com)- Larry Keane, General Counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, stating its position on FOX News on Friday, February 27, 2015, made an admirable case for stopping the rogue federal agency BATFE, in its outrageous attempt to ban ammunition to the American public, but like all mainstream firearms groups, there is a critical mistake in the proposals.

The unelected bureaucrats at BATFE have no legitimate power to ban ammunition. Arguing fine points about one type of ammunition or another misses the constitutional reality of the subject. They fall into the subterfuge trap set by the Obama administration’s headlong disdain for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.

Banning ammunition infringes upon the Second Amendment and is forbidden. BATFE and Congress have no authority to act in this arena. Government is only legitimate if it acts with the consent of the governed. That consent is found in our Constitution. Elected and appointed officials are specifically prohibited from acting in this regard. These out-of-control unelected bureaucrats should not just apologize, as Keane politely requests, or withdraw as others suggest.

The people responsible for this travesty should be placed under arrest for attempting to grossly violate the specific enumerated Second Amendment rights of the people. There is no tolerance for deviation from this standard of legal performance. Imprisonment for this fundamental departure from rule of law and protection of the innocent is required for such acts of tyranny, to forestall popular uprising against usurpation.

BATFE has shown its true colors yet again in this tyrannical attempt to incrementally disarm the U.S. public, which JPFO alone recognizes and voices. BATFE stands out among federal agencies in attempting such rogue, illegal and contemptible actions. The responsible parties should be dealt with swiftly and harshly, to set examples for others who might contemplate such illegal usurpations of power.

With respect to so-called armor-piercing ammunition, and a remedy for its use:

Any shot fired at lawful authorities is illegal.

Any shot fired at any innocent person is illegal.

Murder is punishable by death.

Attempted murder is illegal with severe punishment.

Inchoate aggravated assault carries severe penalties.

The type of ammunition or weapons used is immaterial and of no consequence.

The ability to pierce a bullet-resistant garment is immaterial and without consequence.

Shooting at innocent officials is of no greater consequence than shooting at any innocent black person or innocent Jew or any other innocent human being.

Raising the penalty or consequence for shooting at one innocent person over another is immoral.

The government’s effort to ban accurate ammunition, leaving the public with only less-than-accurate ammunition, is a detestable affront to human decency, the right to protect life and limb, and the holy principles of the Second Amendment to the United States.

The so-called “news” media, in failing to even explore such fundamental and basic issues, betrays its duty to inform the American public.

Writing letters to rogue agency officials as BATFE beseeches us to do before they issue dictums is a fool’s errand and complete waste of time and energy.

This is the position of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and should be the position of any right thinking human being.

THE JPFO POSITION ON BATFE DOCUMENT:

“ATF FRAMEWORK FOR DETERMINING WHETHER CERTAIN PROJECTILES ARE “PRIMARILY INTENDED FOR SPORTING PURPOSES” WITHIN THE MEANING OF 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C)”

Using complex legal reasoning in a 17-page document, BATFE plans to ban a certain type of 5.56 caliber ammunition, which it now claims has become armor piercing, and hence more dangerous, after having classified it not so, for decades.

That document addresses issues beyond the delegated powers of government, is outside the government’s legitimate authority to regulate, where it has no legal ability to legislate, regulate or make policy, and is therefore technically null and void.

If needed, Kosher policy in this field would be: “Penetrating the body armor of a person, using anything, with intent to do harm without justification, is a crime.”

Regulating ammunition as BATFE proposes violates the Second Amendment. The Constitution allows no infringement in this regard. Congress has no authority in this field, and cannot delegate any power in this respect to any of its agencies. BATFE, by issuing this dictum is behaving as a rogue agency, its staff needs to be severely disciplined and, as we have called for in the past, disbanded, to prevent any more in a long line of usurpations, abuses and illegal activities.

About Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership (JPFO)

Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership Mission is to destroy “gun control” and to encourage Americans to understand and defend all of the Bill of Rights for everyone. Those are the twin goals of Wisconsin-based Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (JPFO). Founded by Jews and initially aimed at educating the Jewish community about the historical evils that Jews have suffered when they have been disarmed, JPFO has always welcomed persons of all religious beliefs who share a common goal of opposing and reversing victim disarmament policies while advancing liberty for all. JPFO is a non-profit tax-exempt educational civil rights organization, not a lobby. JPFO’s products and programs reach out to as many segments of the American people as possible, using bold tactics without compromise on fundamental principles.

Bellevue, WA -(Ammoland.com)- A federal court in Texas has denied a government motion for a 60-day stay in a case involving interstate handgun transfers in which the judge applied strict scrutiny to determine whether a ban on such transfers meets constitutional muster.

The case, known as Mance v. Holder, was filed by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and is financially supported by the Second Amendment Foundation. It involves plaintiffs residing in Texas and the District of Columbia, and the ruling last month by U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor of the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division, found that “the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is unconstitutional on its face.”

The government had asked for a 60-day stay in order to decide whether to file an appeal. But Judge O’Connor ruled today that a stay is not warranted because the government could offer no other reasons for its request other than the court’s “inherent authority to manage its docket.”

“We’re delighted that Judge O’Connor is not going to simply allow the government to stall this ruling,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “This case could have significant ramifications nationwide, and allowing a two-month stay while the government essentially claims it will be thinking about whether to appeal obviously was not warranted.”

CCRKBA and the individual plaintiffs are represented by Virginia attorney Alan Gura and Texas attorney William B. “Bill” Mateja of Fish & Richardson in Dallas.

About Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA)

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at www.CCRKBA.org or by email to InformationRequest@ccrkba.org.

The ATF is specifically claiming the ability to regulate ammunition via the “armor piercing” language contained in the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act, an amendment added to the GCA in 1986.

Their current focus is on banning the wildly popular M855 round for AR-15 rifles.

Rooney’s bill would roll back the ATF’s powers to pre-1986 levels.

According to The Hill, Rooney’s bill “would prohibit the ATF or any other federal agency from issuing or enforcing any new restriction or prohibition on the manufacture, importation, or sale of ammunition in the United States.”

Rooney said:

The Obama administration’s [proposed ban of M855 ammo] would unilaterally strip law-abiding hunters and sportsmen of their Second Amendment rights. Congress has made its intentions clear that this ammunition is for sporting purposes and should not be restricted. We cannot and will not stand by while the Obama administration tramples on the constitution, the rule of law, and the Second Amendment rights of hunters.

]]>http://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/republican-introduces-bill-revoking-atfs-power-to-regulate-ammo/feed/2NYPD Statistics Prove SAFE ACT Does Not Make New York City Saferhttp://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/nypd-statistics-prove-safe-act-does-not-make-new-york-city-safer/
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/nypd-statistics-prove-safe-act-does-not-make-new-york-city-safer/#commentsTue, 03 Mar 2015 14:57:07 +0000http://www.ammoland.com/?p=196258NYPD Statistics Prove SAFE ACT Does Not Make New York City SaferNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association

“Elected officials from the Governor on down touted the supposed benefits to public safety the SAFE Act would bring,”NYSRPA President Tom King said.

“The gun control lobby followed them up with unsubstantiated claims ( http://tiny.cc/ahfxux ) a lazy media did not bother to investigate. Yet when the facts come out disproving their assertions, both the politicians and antigun lobbyists are silent.”

King concluded, “Here’s my suggestion to the New York media: Track down all those SAFE supporters and ask them, in light of the evidence, to justify their position.”

About:
The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association is the state’s largest and oldest firearms advocacy organization. Since 1871, our organization has been dedicated to the preservation of Second Amendment rights, firearm safety, education and training, and the shooting sports. Our membership consists of individuals and clubs throughout the state. We are a not-for-profit 501(c)4 organization and the official NRA-affiliated State Association in New York. Visit: www.nysrpa.org

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Maine may be gearing up to pass constitutional carry. A young state Senator Eric Brakey, has introduced a bill to restore the ability to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

He has gathered 96 sponsors for the bill, which is short and easy to understand. The bill is not quite complete constitutional carry, in that it exludes long guns, such as rifles and shotguns.

B. A person may not, while in or on a motor vehicle or in or on a trailer or other type of vehicle being hauled by a motor vehicle, have a cocked and armed crossbow or a firearm with a cartridge or shell in the chamber or in an attached magazine, clip or cylinder or a muzzle-loading firearm charged with powder, lead and a primed ignition device or mechanism, except that a person who has a valid Maine permit to carry a concealed weapon is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm may have in or on a motor vehicle or trailer or other type of vehicle a loaded pistol or revolver covered by that permit.

Sec. 2. 25 MRSA §2001-A, sub-§2, ¶A-1 is enacted to read:

A-1. A handgun carried by a person who is not otherwise prohibited from carrying a firearm;

Summary

This bill authorizes a person who is not prohibited from possessing a firearm to carry a concealed handgun without a permit. This bill also authorizes a person to possess a loaded pistol or revolver while in a motor vehicle or a trailer or other vehicle being hauled by a motor vehicle.

Senator Brakey has gathered an impressive number of sponsors. The makeup of the Maine legislature is as follows;

Paul supports the 2nd amendment–no exceptions. While Paul is Governor, he will:

Protect Mainers’ Gun Rights. Paul will veto any legislation that restricts Mainers’ constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

The stumbling block could be the Maine House. It is controlled by Democrats, and if the Democrat leadership does not want to hear a bill, it is likely that it will not be heard, even if a majority of he legislators have sponsored it. It remains to be seen what the Democrat leadership in the Maine House of representatives will do on this issue.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

(AmmoLand.com) When the United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) hosts it’s first-ever Concealed Carry Expo in West Bend, Wisconsin, the emphasis will be on training and information. World-class trainers and nationally known firearms experts will create a living classroom focused on self-defense and firearms safety.

Guests speakers already confirmed for the event include Dave Young, Founder and Director of Arma Training, who will conduct training on weapon retention, firearms survival tactics and preparing for a gunfight. USCCA contributing writer Beth Alcazar will lead a presentation titled “Concealed Carry for Moms: Breaking the Mold.” George Harris, co-founder of the SIG Academy will address “Foundations of Shooting for Personal Defense.”

Show attendees may also attend the Concealed Carry Fashion show, which will include presentations by USCCA President and CEO, Tim Schmidt, Mark Walters of Armed American Radio, and Milwaukee County Sheriff, David A. Clarke Jr.

“The goal of the Concealed Carry Expo is to provide anyone interested in self-defense and personal protection the best possible information and training. Keeping responsibly armed Americans well informed is the basis of firearms safety and personal freedom. We intend to do this in a fun, family-friendly environment,” said Executive Editor of Concealed Carry Magazine, Kevin Michalowski

The 2015 USCCA Concealed Carry Expo is the first expo of its kind dedicated to the concealed carry lifestyle. The event is completely supported by the USCCA and contributing sponsors. With more than 125,000 member/subscribers, the USCCA is the fastest-growing advocate for concealed carry and the industry leader in self-defense insurance.

The U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) is the first and largest, member-owned association designed to educate, train, and insure responsibly armed Americans. USCCA members receive criminal and civil defense insurance protection through the Self-Defense SHIELD and have access to a wealth of industry information including expert advice, product information, and the latest news centered on the concealed carry lifestyle. The USCCA also publishes Concealed Carry Magazine, hosts the nationally syndicated radio program, Armed American Radio, and offers resources for firearms training through the USCCA Education and Training program.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- An enormous number of defensive shootings are not included in the data about defensive gun use.

These are the shootings of animals, not in defense of people; those are often reported. No, they are defensive shootings of animals in defense of other animals, and often crops or other property. In defense of animals, the species most often shot are dogs.

There are occasional cries of outrage when someone has to shoot a dog in order to save another animal. They usually come from people who have no conception of reality outside their apartment or suburban home. These people seem to live in a bubble where, in their mind, dogs never do anything wrong, and they should always live wonderful lives where someone else has to pay for their owner’s irresponsibility, and the damages the dogs cause.

People do not like to shoot dogs. People do not like to pay taxes or get up every morning and go to work. People do these things because they need to be done. Here are some examples of dogs that were shot by people who had to. They never made the news; they only came to my attention because responsible people tried to educate naive folks who seem to believe that the world is, or can be, perfect.

I am a disabled veteran. I held eight military occupational skills, one of which was animal technician(91T). One of my overseas stations was in Vietnam were I was with the Dog training Detachment in Bien Hoa and later at the 936th Veterinary Hospital. Dogs are my life. My username is the name of one of my service dogs that past away about three years ago at 14 years of age. I had him since he was 2 months old.

On the fourth of January a dog, a pit bull, jumped my 5 foot fence and attacked one of my goats. I walked right up to my goat and the dog and shined my flashlight right into the dog’s face. He refused to let go of my goat. He kept trying to pull the goat in an opposite direction away from me. I did not know the dog. I did not want to kick or hit the dog because I could become the victim of the dog’s attack. I was left with one option. I drew my firearm and shot the dog at point blank range. I did not want to do it. I did everything except coming directly between the dog and the object of his attack, my goat. It had to be done to save my goat and protect myself. A police report was filed.

Within less than a minute after I shot a truck pulls into my yard. Apparently they saw my flashlight shining around the goat pasture. A man got out and asked “have you seen a dog”. He said it was his wife’s dog and she had just let the dog out to do it’s business. A pet, a house dog. And now it was dead because outside of it’s home it had become an aggressive, ferocious animal intent on killing livestock.

If only they had come just 60 seconds sooner. I did not like shooting the dog. I have had many dogs wonder through my place. I have had a few that even challenged me and I would put my hand on my firearm, but, they would finally run off and I would relax. But, this is the first one that I was forced to shoot. Why couldn’t the owners have shown up just 60 seconds prior? I saw many bullet and explosive wounds in Vietnam and other places. I can still see the bullet wounds, and the fatal wound on this dog. A forever mental picture that I can not get rid of.

From neal kluba:

When I was a kid my dad was also placed in this position as well. We, however, did lose one calf and had a cow get her leg pretty torn up as well. I remember dad crying as he is a dog lover as well, My prayers go out to this poor guy.

My Aunt and Uncle run a large Dairy Farm in Wisconsin. They lost 2 calves and a goat that had to be put down to the attack by their neighbors dogs. 3 mix breed labs. The county took them did there test and gave them back. 3 days later 63 stitches to my Aunts horse. One was dead and other ones taken and liquidated. This was 3 year ago. They are still fighting for reimbursement for damages caused by their dogs. Keep your dogs under control or this happens.

From SoCalApril:

I love animals more than people – however – has anyone ever seen a dog attack farm animals??? Ever seen a dog eat a chicken alive, or worse yet, two dogs attack a cow or calf??? I doubt it, because if you had, you would ASK someone to shoot the dogs – imagine the sound that a normal cow or calf make, now picture two dogs eating that animal from the hoof up, it is horrifying, and NO it isn’t like you can run up and shoo away two dogs in the middle of an attack. And yes – labs do attack. These dogs are dead because of the owner that doesn’t care if other animals die over his lack of fencing.

These are the stories that do not make the news. They do not because no law was broken by the shooters. At most, it is a civil matter that no one thinks worth reporting, and no one puts pictures of the aftermath on a Facebook post.

But, they are very, very, common. People in rural areas are far more likely to shoot animals in defense of other animals or of property than they are likely to even brandish a firearm at another person. There are few people in rural areas who will not tell you of shooting animals for defense of other animals or of their property.

None of these shootings are counted in the totals of defensive uses of firearms in the surveys. If they were, the defensive use statistics would be many millions more per year.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Constitutional carry is moving in New Hampshire. The bill is SB116 in the Senate and HB582 in the House. It passed the Senate on 12 February. It was introduced by the Senate Majority leader. Constitutional carry came within a hair of being passed in 2011. Many believe that hamhanded tactics by the NRA representative killed the process. In 2011, it had passed the House, 244 to 109. The bill is to be voted on in the House Committee on Tuesday, 3 March. Here is the analysis of SB116/HB582:

This bill:I. Increases the length of time for which a license to carry a pistol or revolver is valid.II. Allows a person to carry a loaded, concealed pistol or revolver without a license unless such person is otherwise prohibited by New Hampshire statute.III. Requires the director of the division of state police to negotiate and enter into agreements with other jurisdictions to recognize in those jurisdictions the validity of the license to carry issued in this state.IV. Repeals the requirement to obtain a license to carry a concealed pistol or revolver.

Constitutional carry has expanded to five or six states, depending on how you count. Some count Montana, others do not. Vermont, which borders New Hampshire, has always had constitutional carry, and has never had a problem with it. Vermont’s crime rates are lower than most European countries, and are the envy of other states. Their example is a powerful argument for constitutional carry in New Hampshire.

Several other states have passed bills in previous years, often with large margins. Some have been vetoed by hostile governors. Constitutional carry is currently in play in West Virginia, Kansas, North Carolina, South Dakota, Idaho, and Maine. The Utah bill has become dormant.

In New Hampshire, HB582 will be voted on in the House Criminal Justice and Safety Committee on Tuesday, 3 March, 2015. Here are the committee members who will determine if the bill lives or dies:

Whether you are for or against the bill, if you decide to contact any or all of the committee members, remember that they deserve to be treated with the same level of courtesy that you would treat anyone else.

It is possible that this year, as in 2011, there would be enough votes to overcome a governor’s veto. We will only find out if the committee and the House pass SB116/HB582.

The New Hampshire Senate has 11 Democrats and 13 Republicans. The House has 218 Democrats and 179 Republicans.
c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Arkansas became a constitutional carry state in August of 2013. It took about a year and a half, dozens of open carry marches, and a change of the Attorney General, for that fact to be generally recognized. The picture above is one of the marches taking place in Little Rock. I do not recall a single marcher ever being arrested for carrying a firearm. From thv11.com:

In 2013, former attorney general Dustin McDaniel issued an opinion saying he did not consider Arkansas an open carry state under act 746. We asked new attorney general Leslie Rutledge about her interpretation of the law. “I interpret it to mean an individual may carry so long as he or she does so without the intent to unlawfully employ it against another person,” she said. “But anytime law enforcement and citizens disagree on a law we need to ensure there is clarity to protect our citizens.”

Texas is struggling to make reality match its reputation as a second amendment friendly state. There have been dozens, perhaps hundreds, of open carry marches in Texas this last year, with long guns, as modern sidearms are generally not allowed to be open carried in public in Texas. The infringements on open carry date to reconstruction, after the Civil War, or War Between the States, if you prefer. It appears likely that some form of open carry will pass this year. To help it along, a cross border open carry walk is planned for Texarkana near the end of March. The state line runs down the middle of a street in the city.

From Conley Hennigan, who is organizing the demonstration it will occur on 28 March, starting at 12:00 pm CDT:

Check it out! Arkansas has been a constitutional carry state since August of 2013 under Act 746, Texarkana is the only major city in Arkansas that claims they do not recognize ACT 746. Even the new AG of Arkansas opines that it is constitutional carry. OCT will be crossing into Arkansas after we conclude our event in Texas to open carry modern handguns and educate Arkansans about their rights under 746. CJ Grisham, the president and founder of OCT will also be in attendance. Come take a stand and flex your rights!

Texas Open Carry March

Hennigan and others have set up some rules for the march. They have posted the information below. Link on Facebook:

Come and walk both sides of the line with us as we flex our rights and educate the public about the current law in Texas and how it compares to Arkansas as well as many other states and what we plan to change about it! CJ Grisham, the president and founder of OCT will also be in attendance. Come and meet the spark that ignited a wildfire in the push for more gun rights and liberty for Texans! We will be meeting in the parking area between Fuzzy’s Tacos and Wing stop on the Texas side. After we are finished in Texas we will cross into Arkansas to exercise a right denied to us by the state of Texas. We will be carrying modern handguns openly under Arkansas’s constitutional carry law Act 746, no licence required. This is a can’t miss two state event! Be there!

***Long guns and black powder revolvers only in Texas, firearms must be slung or holstered at all times with no rounds in the chamber***

***Modern handguns only in Arkansas, must be in a holster***

***You are not required to be armed to attend***

***This is a family friendly event, feel free to bring your spouse and kids***

This kind of activism is restoring second amendment rights all over the country, but this is the first time that I have read of a march designed to cross state lines.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Constitutional carry, or permitless carry, has passed the West Virginia Senate with an astonishing 32 to 2 vote. That means that 14 of the 16 Democrats in the Senate voted for the bill. The two that voted against it were Sen. Ronald Miller (D) and Senator Corey Palumbo (D). Perhaps the vote is not that astonishing.

After all, this is merely the state of affairs that the country was in for most of its existence, nearly everywhere, before the Civil War, or War Between the States if you prefer. Even after the war, most states did not criminalize concealed carry until the progressive wave swept the country after 1900. Recent experience in Arkansas, Wyoming, Arizona, and Alaska have shown that repealing the bans on concealed carry result in no change in crime rates. There may even be a slight decrease. Vermont has had constitutional carry for its entire history, and has one of the lowest crime rates in the nation, ranking with the most law abiding European nations, such as Switzerland.

The House looks likely to pass the bill as well. In the House, Republicans outnumber Democrats 64 to 36.

(a) Any person who carries a concealed deadly weapon without a state license or other lawful authorization established under the provisions of this code, who is prohibited from possessing firearms under section seven of this article shall be is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than $100 nor more than $1,000 and may be imprisoned in the county jail for not more than twelve months for the first offense; but upon conviction of a second or subsequent offense, he or she shall be is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be imprisoned in the penitentiary a state correctional facility not less than one nor more than five years and fined not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000.

It removes the prohibition of carrying concealed handguns on the person while hunting.

(a) Notwithstanding any provision of this code to the contrary, a person licensed to carry a concealed weapon pursuant to the provisions of section four, article seven, chapter sixty-one of this code who is not prohibited at the time from possessing a firearm pursuant to the provisions of section seven, article seven, chapter sixty-one of this code or by any applicable federal law may carry a handgun in a concealed manner for self defense purposes while afield hunting, hiking, camping or in or on a motor vehicle.

The bill leaves in place the existing permit system so that those who wish to have a permit for reciprocity purposes will be able to do so.

It is not known if Governor Tomblin will sign the bill, but it appears to have veto proof majorities in the making. Governor Tomblin signed a bill requiring confiscated firearm to be sold instead of destroyed, in 2012. In 2014, he signed a bill that preempts local governments from creating a mishmash of gun laws throughout the state.

West Virginia may well become the first state to pass constitutional carry this year.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Why else would Hillary Clinton personally send out lies about Benghazi within hours, and then keep on pushing these lies until the truth could no longer be ignored. The truth about an attack by an al Qaeda group that killed our ambassador and three other brave Americans in the days before Obama’s reelection would not only have put Obama at risk of losing, but also would have potentially dashed the hopes of his successor-in-waiting, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The desperation by Obama, Clinton, and their political teams must have been potent. It was so potent that they – rather than admitting to the Islamist conflagration they caused in Libya by ousting and killing Gadhafi – preferred to ignore pleas for increased security from Ambassador Stevens; to abandon him and his colleagues to rampaging terrorists; refuse to follow up with force against those who attacked us; and to lie to the American people about the nature of the attack.

Rather than admit that it was a planned attack by a terrorist group in league with al Qaeda, the Obama/Clinton machine knowingly put out the lie that the killings were the result of a spontaneous demonstration in response to an obscure Internet video supposedly offensive to radical Islamists. The message: don’t blame us – blame those who offend Islamists (conservatives, Republicans, etc.). Indeed, rather than sending our military to eliminate the enemy in Libya, the Obama administration arrested the poor sap who made the offending video.

Strong stuff you might think. But the most recent documents forced out of the State Department will make you think I’m being too kind to the Benghazi betrayers controlling the Executive Branch.

On February 11, 2015, JW struck smoking-gun gold in another cache of documents we forced out of the State Department. The documents show that top aides for then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, including her then-chief of staff Cheryl Mills, knew from the outset that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group. The documents we’ve extracted from the Obama administration only through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State ((No. 1:14-cv-01511).

Unsurprisingly, the documents make no reference to a spontaneous demonstration or Internet video, except in an official statement issued by Hillary Clinton.

The JW lawsuit that uncovered this material focused on Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the Benghazi scandal:

Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S, Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes but is not limited to, notes, taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

Mrs. Clinton had said she took notes on Benghazi for her recent book but suggested no one could see them. She isn’t above the law. Congress is asleep, the media is a cheerleader, so hence, our lawsuit.

We haven’t yet gotten Hillary’s notes, but the chain of internal emails we did get are extraordinary and track the events surrounding the terrorist attack in real time.

On September 11, 2012, at 4:07 PM, Maria Sand (who was then a Special Assistant to Mrs. Clinton) forwarded an email from the State Department’s Operations Center entitled “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi is Under Attack(SBU) [Sensitive But Unclassified]” to Cheryl Mills (then-Chief of Staff), Jacob Sullivan (then-Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy), Joseph McManus (then-Hillary Clinton’s Executive Assistant), and a list of other Special Assistants in the Secretary’s office:

The Regional Security Officer reports the diplomatic mission is under attack. Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well. Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four COM [Chief of Mission] personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.

This email was sent about 30 minutes after the terrorist attack began!

DSCC received a phone call from [REDACTED] in Benghazi, Libya initially stating that 15 armed individuals were attacking the compound and trying to gain entrance. The Ambassador is present in Benghazi and currently is barricaded within the compound. There are no injuries at this time and it is unknown what the intent of the attackers is. At approximately 1600 DSCC received word from Benghazi that individuals had entered the compound. At 1614 RSO advised the Libyans had set fire to various buildings in the area, possibly the building that houses the Ambassador [REDACTED] is responding and taking fire.

Nearly seven hours later, at 12:04 am, on September 12, Randolph sends an email with the subject line “FW: Update 3: Benghazi Shelter Location Also Under Attack” to Mills, Sullivan, and McManus that has several updates about the Benghazi attack:

I just called Ops and they said the DS command center is reporting that the compound is under attack again. I am about to reach out to the DS Command Center.

This email also contains a chain of other, earlier email updates:

September 11, 2012 11:57 PM email: “(SBU) DS Command reports the current shelter location for COM personnel in Benghazi is under mortar fire. There are reports of injuries to COM staff.”

September 11, 2012, 4:54 PM: “Embassy Tripoli reports the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi has stopped and the compound has been cleared. A response team is on site to locate COM personnel.”

Embassy Tripoli confirms the death of Ambassador John C. (Chris) Stevens in Benghazi. His body has been recovered and is at the airport in Benghazi.

Two hours later, Joseph McManus forwards the news about Ambassador Stevens’ death to officials in the State Department Legislative Affairs office with instructions not to “forward to anyone at this point.”

Despite her three top staff members being informed that a terrorist group had claimed credit for the attack, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, issued an official statement, also produced to Judicial Watch, claiming the assault may have been in “a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

Cheryl Mills asks that the State Department stop answering press inquiries at 12:11 am on September 12, despite the ongoing questions about “Chris’ whereabouts.” In an email to State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, Jacob Kennedy, and Phillipe Reines (then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Strategic Communications and Senior Communications Advisor), Mills writes:

Can we stop answering emails for the night Toria b/c now the first one [Hillary Clinton’s “inflammatory material posted on the Internet” statement] is hanging out there.

Earlier in the chain of emails, Nuland told Mills, Sullivan, and Patrick Kennedy (Under Secretary of State for Management) that she “ignored” a question about Ambassador Steven’s status and whereabouts from a CBS News reporter.

Think about this: Cheryl Mills, Hillary’s top aide, would rather go to bed and let hang out there the lie that Hillary Clinton put out about the attack than tell reporters the truth about the attack, which by that time had escalated to include mortar fire.

Another top State Department official is eager to promote a statement from Rabbi David Saperstein, then-Director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, a liberal group. The September 2012 statement condemns “the video that apparently spurred these incidents. It was clearly crafted to provoke, offend, and to evoke outrage.” Michael Posner, then-Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, forwarded the statement on September 12, 2012, to Wendy Sherman, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, and Jacob Sherman with the note:

This is an excellent statement – our goal should be to get the Conference of Presidents, the ADL etc. to follow suit and use similar language.

(President Obama nominated the left-wing Rabbi Saperstein to be Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom in July 2014. The U.S. Senate confirmed him in December 2014. Posner, by the way, is another far left activist installed at State by Obama.)

Also included in the documents are foreign press reports establishing the cause of Ambassador Chris Steven’s death as being from asphyxiation. According to the reports, doctors attending Stevens said he could have been saved had he arrived at the hospital earlier.

The Obama administration has blacked out reactions from White House and top State Department officials to news stories published on September 14, 2012. One of the stories quoted a visitor who criticized the lack of security at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound and another headlined, “America ‘was warned of attack and did nothing.'” What was the reaction of key Obama officials to this truth-telling about the media. They don’t want you to know. If it were helpful, it would have been released to us!

Other emails list well over 20 invited participants in a “SVTC” (secure video teleconference). The invited participants for the September 14, 2012, early morning call include senior White House, CIA, and State Department political appointees. Details about that call, which likely documents the cover-up operation on Benghazi, haven’t been produced to Judicial Watch.

These emails leave no doubt that Hillary Clinton’s closest advisers knew the truth about the Benghazi attack from almost the moment it happened. And it is inescapable that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knowingly lied when she planted the false story about “inflammatory material being posted on the Internet.”

The contempt for the public’s right to know is evidenced not only in these documents, but also in the fact that we had to file a lawsuit in federal court to obtain them. The Obama gang’s cover-up continues to unravel, despite its unlawful secrecy and continued slow-rolling of information.

Congress, if it ever decides to do its job, cannot act soon enough to put Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, and every other official in these emails under oath.

Islamic terrorists connected to al Qaeda attacked the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi on the evening of September 11, 2012. U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith were both killed. Just a few hours later, a second terrorist strike targeted a different compound about one mile away. Two CIA contractors, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were killed and 10 others were injured in the second attack.

The families of those four men deserve truth and accountability. So do those who suffered injuries and others haunted by the attacks.

So as Congress is set to acquiesce in Obama’s deadly nullification of our nation’s immigration laws…

So as the mainstream media spends all of its time covering presidential wanna-be’s with all the depth of entertainment media coverage of the Oscars…

So as “Rome burns,” your Judicial Watch will, alone it seems, continue with the hard work of conducting government oversight in a city otherwise bereft of it. The Benghazi Four deserve no less.

We expect more Benghazi documents over the next few months, so stayed tuned for more disclosures.

Tom Fitton
President
Judicial Watch

About Judicial Watch:
Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach. Visit: www.judicialwatch.org

“Because No One Is Above The Law”

]]>http://www.ammoland.com/2015/03/new-documents-blow-lid-off-obama-clinton-benghazi-scandal/feed/2NYT Reports ATF’s AR-15 Ammo Ban Has Been in The Works For Yearshttp://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/nyt-reports-atfs-ar-15-ammo-ban-has-been-in-the-works-for-years/
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/nyt-reports-atfs-ar-15-ammo-ban-has-been-in-the-works-for-years/#commentsSun, 01 Mar 2015 01:27:17 +0000http://www.ammoland.com/?p=196087By AWR HawkinsNYT Reports ATF’s AR-15 Ammo Ban Has Been in The Works For YearsAmmoLand Gun News

Washington DC - -(Ammoland.com)- The New York Times reports that the ATF’s proposed AR-15 ammo ban has been in the works for over three years.

The proposed ban, previously reported, would bar law-abiding citizens from purchasing popular M855 ammo for their AR-15s by re-categorizing the ammunition as “armor piercing,” then outlawing it under the auspices of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (CCA).

The GCA regulations only apply to handguns, but Obama’s ATF is citing the existence of AR-15 pistols to justify a crackdown on 5.56 ammo compatible with pistols and rifles alike.

The proposal by the AFT to reclassify the rifle ammunition started more than three years ago, before the [Sandy Hook Elementary attack], and included meetings with members of the firearms industry [who protested the arbitrary rule change], advocacy groups and law enforcement officials.

Those three years have culminated in the current ammo ban proposal, and “after the 30-day comment period expires on March 13… Attorney General [Eric Holder]” will decide whether the ban stands or falls.

On February 26 2015, Rush Limbaugh summed up the efforts behind the ammo ban by saying, “[Obama] wants to take guns out of everybody’s hands and if he can’t do that, he’s going to take the bullets that go in the guns out of everybody’s hands.”

]]>http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/nyt-reports-atfs-ar-15-ammo-ban-has-been-in-the-works-for-years/feed/6Court Enforces Constitutional Right to Arms, This Time For a Non-Violent Felonhttp://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/court-enforces-constitutional-protection-of-right-to-arms/
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/court-enforces-constitutional-protection-of-right-to-arms/#commentsSun, 01 Mar 2015 01:06:42 +0000http://www.ammoland.com/?p=196078By Dean WeingartenCourt Enforces Constitutional Right to Arms, This Time For a Non-Violent FelonDean Weingarten

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- A St. Louis Judge has ruled that Missouri’s tough new protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not just a paper tiger.

In the first ruling of its kind, the court ruled that a person cannot be prohibited from the right to keep and bear arms under Missouri statutes, for a non-violent felony.

St. Louis Circuit Judge Robert Dierker ruled that the Missouri law prohibiting felons from possessing guns is unconstitutional as applied in the case of Raymond Robinson, in part because it fails to differentiate between violent and non-violent felons.

The amendment declares the right to keep and bear arms “unalienable” and subjects laws restricting gun rights to “strict scrutiny.”

Dierker limited his decision to the circumstances of Robinson’s situation; it is not binding on other cases. It also has no effect on a federal law prohibiting felons from possession guns.

I have read Judge Dierker’s opinion. It is exceptionally well done. The logic is clear and the issues are well defined. Mr. Robinson had been convicted of a felony over 10 years ago, in 2003. The conviction was for a non-violent crime; ironically, for illegal carry of a firearm. As Missouri’s shall issue law did not become effective before September of 2003, and it takes some time to process permits, Mr. Robinson could not have obtained a permit to carry the firearm at the time of his conviction.

The Missouri constitution is now clear. Judges are not allowed wiggle room to declare that a right only applies in a few rare circumstances, or that some fuzzy state purpose overrides the right. Here is the amendment that passed last year.

“Section 23. That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the general assembly from enacting general laws which limit the rights of convicted violent felons or those adjudicated by a court to be a danger to self or others as result of a mental disorder or mental infirmity.

The sponsor of the legislation is quoted in the St. Louis Today article as saying:

But he insisted that allowing felons to automatically have possession of firearms was not “the intent or legal effect of Amendment 5.”

I suspect that Senator Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, is being precise and truthful. The intent and effect of the amendment does not automatically allow felons to have possession of firearms. It makes a significant differentiation, between violent felons and non-violent felons. This is a crucial distinction that seems lost on the writer of the article in St. Louis Today, Alex Stuckey.

There has long been a creeping movement to make more and more minor crimes into felonies. Carrying a gun, a right protected under the Constitution, is hardly a good reason to take away the constitutional right.

Here is a link to the pdf file of the judges opinion. It is through the St. Louis Today web site, so I do not know how long it will be available. The case number is 1422-CR02936-01, and it is in the twenty second circuit court in St. Louis.

Many people have said that these sort of constitutional amendments do not strengthen the right to keep and bear arms. This case shows that in Missouri, it did just that.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Spokane, WA - -(Ammoland.com)- Armed patriots will be converging on the Tom Foley federal courthouse at 920 W Riverside Ave, on February 6, 2015 to protest the illegal arrest and detention of a prominent liberty activist.

“Our State, Our Rights: The Patriots Answer'” rally is slated for 11:00 am, and the armed patriots are expecting a large turnout to protest the overreach of federal authorities, who used the Patriot Act to deny the activist his Miranda rights, access to an attorney, and even access to toilet paper while detained.

Anthony Bosworth, part of the Liberty for All leadership, was arrested and detained in a steel cage for five hours by federal agents while attending a 10th Amendment rally in the public courtyard outside the federal courthouse on February 25 2015. The agents, representing Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Marshal Service, claimed that Bosworth was violating federal law by being openly armed.

Open Carry Of Firearms Is Legal In Washington State

During the detention, the FBI subjected Bosworth to a three-hour interrogation regarding his liberty activism, and demanding information about “the movement’s intentions.” They did this in vain.

Bosworth was released due to intervention by the Spokane County Sheriff, who spoke with the federal agents and agreed with witnesses that Bosworth was not in violation of the law. The federal authorities cited Bosworth for “failure to comply,” and did not return his firearms.

Patriots are being asked to attend the rally from all over the country. This is a peaceable and non-violent action, but people are asked to come armed, and to carry responsibly.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)-
Both houses of the Michigan legislature have passed their signature gun reform legislation. The bills will be sent to Governor Snyder again. In January, the Governor vetoed nearly identical bills over minor parts that had been trumpeted in the media as significant. The legislature took out the minor parts of the bill that the media had objected to, and quickly passed the nearly identical legislation by large, veto-proof margins. The bills make a large number of small changes to the administration of the concealed carry law, effectively making the law uniform state wide, and doing away with the 1920s era county gun boards. The bill is 85 pages in pdf format.

Both bills have been “enrolled” as of 26 February. That means that both bills have identical versions agreed to by both houses, and are ready to be sent to Governor Snyder. Here are a few of the changes that seemed more consequential:

No charge for second set of fingerprints if required by the state.

If no permit or disqualification in 45 days, receipt acts as permit.

Plastic, not paper used for the permit material

Notification of expiration 3-6 months before expiration

Allow online application of renewal

Active duty military and reserves to be able to apply for renewal by mail if on duty outside the state.

Expiration date of permit extended if renewal made in time.

Range time for renewal reqirement met with certification on renewal form that applicants have complied with 3 hours review of training, 1 hour range time, within 6 months of renewal.

Record keeping by the State patrol of offenses committed by license holders.

The last is of interest to researchers, as it insures more complete coverage of information, all put in an easily read format.

From the legislative website, here is the Senate staff’s analysis of what the bill does:Senate Bill 34 (S-1) would amend the handgun licensure law to do the following:

– Eliminate county concealed weapon licensing boards effective October 1, 2015, and require the boards to transfer all license applications and official documents to the county clerks.

— Require the Michigan Department of State Police (MSP) to verify, through the Law Enforcement Information Network and a national criminal background check, the requirements for an applicant to receive a CPL and report any statutory disqualification to the county clerk.

— Require each county to establish a concealed pistol licensing fund for administration of the law.

— Reduce the application and licensing fee for a CPL from $105 to $100, effective October 1, 2015, and revise requirements for the distribution of fee revenue.

— Revise the fingerprinting requirements for a CPL applicant, and require the entity providing fingerprint services to issue a receipt to an applicant.

— Provide that, if a CPL or notice of statutory disqualification were not issued within 45 days after the fingerprinting receipt was issued, the receipt would temporarily serve as a CPL.

— Delete a requirement that a licensing board deny a CPL to an applicant who was not qualified under the law to receive a license, and instead require the county clerk to send a notice of statutory disqualification to an applicant who was not qualified.

— Revise provisions related to the appeal of a license denial.

— Delete provisions for the awarding of a temporary CPL.

— Provide for an emergency CPL for an applicant who had obtained a domestic violence or stalking personal protection order or if the county sheriff determined that the applicant or a household or family member was endangered by the applicant’s inability to immediately obtain a CPL.

— Revise procedures for the renewal of a CPL, including requiring an application and licensing fee of $115.

— Require the county clerk to notify a licensee before his or her CPL expired.

— Require the MSP to establish, by October 1, 2018, a system for submitting renewal applications online or by first class mail.

— Revise procedures and the basis for suspension or revocation of a CPL.

— Specify that a person could voluntarily surrender his or her CPL without explanation.

— Revise requirements for the pistol safety training course required for a CPL.

— Revise provisions prohibiting a CPL holder from carrying a concealed pistol or taser while he or she is under the influence of alcohol and/or a controlled substance.

— Require the Secretary of State to make a digitized photograph from a driver license or personal ID card available for use on the CPL, and require a CPL to be constructed of plastic laminated paper or hard plastic.

— Revise information that must be included in a database maintained, and an annual report to the Legislature submitted, by the MSP.

The bill also would repeal sections of the law that do the following:

— Require a prosecuting attorney to notify the appropriate licensing board of a criminal charge against, or conviction of, a CPL holder.

— Allow a licensing board to issue a license for the use of gas ejecting devices to protect premises, vehicles, people, and property from criminal assaults.

Section 5x of the bill, which would require each county to establish a concealed pistol licensing fund, would take effect on April 1, 2015. The rest of the bill would take effect on October 1, 2015.

The bill would take effect on October 1, 2015, and is tie-barred to Senate Bill 34.

It will be interesting to see what Governor Snyder does about this version of the bill. It passed with large, veto proof majorities in both houses. Governor Snyder has vetoed gun reform legislationin 2012 as well as the previous version of this bill in January.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- The above is a screenshot from the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma’s call for applications from journalists to attend a “workshop for journalists on covering guns and gun violence“.

It is from the dartcenter.org website, so you can look for yourself. The workshop specifically includes an invitation for bloggers to apply.

From DART:

To help journalists and news organizations in the Southwest improve their reporting on guns and gun violence, the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma at Columbia Journalism School is organizing a two-day regional workshop May 29 and 30, 2015 for reporters, editors, news directors, photographers, producers, and bloggers.

I have emailed the contact twice, asking rather pointed questions about the list of speakers, and the content. I have not received an answer. I have already sent in my application to attend. I do not expect to be selected. I suspect that this will be a seminar on how to construct propaganda to buttress the political efforts of Michael Bloomberg. He is the person that is supplying the money.

Do not let that dissuade you from applying. At the minimum, you can show that you were turned down. Perhaps someone who is not a committed disarmist will be able to attend, and report on the proceedings.

To apply, please email programs@dartcenter.org with your resume or CV, full contact information (name, address, city, state, zip, phone number and email address) and a one-page letter of interest that:

Describes how and why this workshop is relevant to you and your work;

Identifies three issues around guns or gun violence of particular interest to you;

Explains a challenge you have encountered in pursuing a story on this topic (or a related one); and

Briefly outlines a possible story you might pursue on the topic.

I strongly urge my fellow bloggers to apply. At the minimum, you will be able to brag that you were turned down by The Dart Center.

The event will take place at the end of May. That is a month and a half later than they originally showed on the screenshot, as you can see. It may mean that they are not getting many applications. Applications are to be sent in by 13 April. That gives you plenty of time.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

Vermont has some of the least infringements on second amendment rights in the country. Vermont always had constitutional carry, with no permit required, for its entire history. Vermont has always had one of the lowest crime rates in the country. From burlingtonfreepress.com, a Gannet company:

Supporters of the bill faced strong headwinds, including the opposition of Gov. Peter Shumlin and pushback from Vermont’s hunters and police chiefs. The most controversial provision would have required almost all private gun sales to go through a federally licensed firearms dealer and a background check.

“S.31 is not on the table,” said Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, during a discussion Wednesday morning. “Quite frankly, it’s dead.”

A commenter on the article, Alex Knight made this victory statement:

Freedom and individualism has won, tyranny and collectivism has failed. Bloomberg and your minions, GET OUT. And leave Vermonters and their freedoms ALONE!

One of the principle grass roots organizations opposed to the bill was gunownersofVermont.org. As with most second amendment supporters, they concentrated on facts and logic. Here is some of the testimony(pdf) that they presented to the legislature, concerning Vermont’s stellar record of responsible, unfettered, gun ownership:

There are also millions of firearms in Vermont that have been purchased over the previous 200 years, yet Vermont is consistently the safest state in the nation, and we are comparable to Switzerland, long held to be one of the safest places in the world. The anti-gun crowd would have you believe that there is something wrong with Vermont’s laws that needs to be “fixed”, and that the citizens of Vermont can no longer be trusted. For over 200 years, Vermonters have responsibly owned, traded and used firearms for hunting, target shooting, and self-defense against man and beast, yet now, this centuries old tradition is being challenged by out-of-state voices and money.

Legislatures are afraid of media campaigns financed by billionaires. They are subject to being influenced by large campaign donations. But they fear energized and organized constituents more.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

The US Department of Education reported 392 forcible felonies on Florida Campuses in 2013, under the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act and the Higher Education Opportunity Act. Forcible felonies reported include homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and arson. The number does not include forcible felonies occurring in off-campus college housing or in the surrounding neighborhoods.

This is about licensed adults, responsibly protecting themselves on campus, just as they do off campus, and over a quarter century of statistics from the Licensing Department of DOACS proves their responsibility as a group.

Please support HB 4005.

About:
Florida Carry is a non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots organization dedicated to advancing the fundamental civil right of all Floridians to keep and bear arms for self defense as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 8 of the Florida Constitution. Florida Carry, Inc. was organized by a group of Florida gun rights activists in order to better coordinate activities, effectively lobby the state legislature, and to provide a legal entity capable of filing suit to demand compliance with state and federal law. Florida Carry stands only to represent our members and the over 6 million gun owners of Florida. We are not beholden to any national organization’s agenda that may compromise that mission.
Florida Carry works tirelessly toward repealing and striking down ill-conceived gun control laws that have been proven to provide safe havens to criminals and be deadly to law abiding citizens.

West Virginia Citizens Defense League (WVCDL) members and supporters, I speak for our entire board of directors when I say this. You never cease to amaze us.

Your dedication to your beliefs, and your willingness to act upon them has and continues to shape the future of liberty in our state. You are patriots, all. Your calls, your emails, and your presence in that capitol building have made history. Just four short years ago, the notion of pushing constitutional carry would have been little more than a back room joke. Now it is half way to becoming a reality.

The senate voted 32-2 to pass the bill. Three separate attempts by Senator Mike Romano (D-Harrison) were shot down by overwhelming margins. This happened because of you. This happened because you let the Senate and its leadership know where West Virginia stands on our rights.

We’d also like to thank the lead sponsor of the bill, Senator Dave Sypolt (R-Preston) as well as the following co-sponsors:

Bob Beach (D-Monongalia)

Craig Blair (R-Berkeley)

Ed Gaunch (R-Kanawha)

Daniel Hall (R-Wyoming)

Robert Karnes (R-Upshur)

Kent Leonhardt (R-Monongalia)

Mark Maynard (R-Wayne)

Bob Williams (D-Taylor)

Ryan Ferns (R-Ohio)

Special thanks should also go to Senator Craig Blair for his outstanding behind-the-scenes work on this bill, and to senators Karnes and Leonhardt for their excellent arguments on the floor of the senate in support of your rights.

We also owe special thanks to the NRA-ILA for their presence in the Capitol, working with the WVCDL to shepherd this bill through the process. Their support has been invaluable.

Now the bill goes to the House of Delegates. Stay tuned for updates and possible action items.
CHL Privacy

The CHL Privacy bill, HB2636, is up for a hearing today in the House Judiciary Committee. This bill protects the privacy of those of us who have or will obtain concealed handgun licenses. This will prevent anti-gun media from mapping us like sex offenders. It is expected to pass. However, House Judiciary meetings have been running late into the night, and this bill is the last one on today’s agenda. It is likely that it will run tomorrow, as they will be meeting on Saturday.

This bill will be critical, even if Constitutional Carry passes, due to the large number of us that will maintain our CHLs for purposes of interstate travel.

Keith Morgan President, West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.

About:
The West Virginia Citizens Defense League (WVCDL) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, all-volunteer, grassroots organization of concerned West Virginians who support our individual right to keep and bear arms for defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use, as protected by the state constitution and the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Visit: www.wvcdl.org

We started the session with a LOT of bills, the most MSSA has ever pushed in one session. That’s good and bad.

It’s good because, even given attrition, we’re more likely to come out the other end with a number of bills passed, and I’ve always thought it’s better to keep legislators debating and voting on pro-gun stuff, so they have less time and attention to think about anti-gun stuff. I

t’s bad because it dilutes our efforts and effectiveness somewhat. In net, I think it’s a good strategy, even though it means more work for you and for me.

Here are our successes, so far:

MSSA’s flagship bill, SB 122, (Sen. Matt Rosendale, R-Glendive) to encourage the manufacture of ammunition components in Montana, a jobs bill, passed the Senate and has gone to the House. Because of the tax breaks in the bill, it has been assigned to the House Taxation Committee. That’s where this bill died last session, so we’ll need an extra push this session when the bill comes up for consideration by the House Tax Committee.

MSSA’s campus carry bill, SB 143, (Sen. Cary Smith, R-Billings) has passed the Senate and been transmitted to the House and assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.

MSSA’s suppressors-for-hunting bill, SB 295, (Sen. Mark Blasdel, R-Kalispell) has been passed by the Senate and transmitted to the House, and assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.

MSSA’s bill to prevent enforcement by Montana officials of any new federal firearms or magazine bans, HB 203, (Rep. Art Wittich, R-Bozeman) passed the House, is in the Senate, has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and has been scheduled for a public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee for next Thursday, 3/5, at 9AM.

MSSA’s permitless carry bill, HB 298, (Rep. Bill Harris, R-Winnett) passed the House, has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and is set for public hearing next Friday, 3/6, at 9AM.

MSSA’s Safe Travel to Work bill, HB 505, (Rep. Matthew Monforton, R-Bozeman) was seriously amended by the House Judiciary Committee and has passed the House and gone to the Senate.

Still pending.

Some bills are not subject to the usual, mid-session Transmittal deadline, especially appropriation bills and referenda. MSSA has one of each, and maybe another.

MSSA’s bill to prevent FWP from stealing money the Legislature appropriates for shooting range funding, HB 234, (Rep. Nancy Ballance, R-Hamilton) is still pending before the House Appropriations Committee.

MSSA’s constitutional referendum bill, to remove the this-doesn’t-apply-to-concealed-weapons language from the 1884 RKBA in the Montana Constitution, HB 457, (Rep. Matthew Monforton, R-Bozeman) has been passed by the House Judiciary Committee and is awaiting Second Reading action on the floor of the House.

MSSA still has a bill draft in on a referendum for Sheriffs First, which we may rework and have introduced. Stay tuned for more about this.

Lost

MSSA’s bill to revitalize the Montana Home Guard, SB 130, (Sen. Roger Webb, R-Billings) was tabled by the Senate State Administration Committee.

MSSA’s Sheriffs First bill, HB 274, (Rep. Nancy Ballance, R-Hamilton) was defeated on the floor of the House.

MSSA’s bill to rein in game wardens, HB 281, (Rep. Dale Mortensen, R-Billings) died on the floor of the House.

MSSA’s bill to clarify that schools are not mandated to expel for a year a student who forgets a hunting rifle in the student’s car in the school parking lot, HB 320, (Rep. Carl Glimm, R-Kila) died on the floor of the House.

MSSA’s bill to correct the idiotic law about “Prohibited Places”, HB 371, (Rep. Kerry White, R-Bozeman) died on the floor of the House.

MSSA’s bill to correct a Montana Supreme Court mistake about an existing self defense law, HB 388, (Rep. Randy Pinocci, R-Great Falls) died on the floor of the House.

Bad bills

There have been a number of bad bills, either on the horizon or introduced, that MSSA has opposed.

Universal background checks, to make it illegal to transfer a firearm from one private individual to another without federal government permission and record, was drafted but not introduced. (Sen. Dick Barrett, D-Missoula)

Roll back all of MSSA’s 2009 self defense bill, was drafted but never introduced. (Rep. Ellie Hill, D-Missoula)

To outlaw exploding targets on public lands, HB 160, (Rep. Willis Curdy, D-Missoula) was tabled by the House Judiciary Committee.

Make it a crime to handle firearms carelessly, HB 539, (Rep. Willis Curdy, D-Missoula) is scheduled for a public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee next Thursday, 3/5.

Other bills of interest

HB 212 (Rep. Kirk Wagoner, R-Montana City) would clarify that trapping is included within the right to harvest wild fish and game animals in the Montana Constitution. I testified in support of the bill, and that this had been my intent when I crafted the language for this constitutional referendum. HB 212 was passed by the House and approved by the Senate Fish and Game Committee.

HB 250 (Rep. Kirk Wagoner, R-Montana City) would clarify that it is legal to use suppressors to take unregulated animals in Montana, such as coyotes and Prairie Dogs. This bill is problematic, for two reasons: 1) it makes no change in current law because under current law suppressors are only prohibited for taking regulated wildlife, and 2) the governor could sign this bill and claim credit for signing a suppressor bill while vetoing MSSA’s suppressors-for-hunting bill, SB 295, which actually does something. HB 250 has passed the House and been approved by the Senate Fish and Game Committee.

HB 533 (Rep. Kirk Wagoner, R-Montana City) does some of what MSSA’s Permitless Carry bill does, and some of what MSSA’s Prohibited Places bill would have done, but not all of what either covers. HB 533 has passed the House.

That’s all for now. Thanks SO MUCH for your essential help to date. Now, we’ll need to really knuckle down to push the remaining bills through the process. I’ll keep you informed.

WASHINGTON, D.C. --(Ammoland.com)- U.S. Senator Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) today said the Obama administration should abandon its new effort to ban the use or manufacture of certain types of ammunition used primarily by sportsmen.

Cochran on Friday said a new regulatory effort by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to reclassify 5.56 millimeter projectiles of SS 109 and M855 “green tip” ammunition as “armor-piercing ammunition” runs afoul of the Law Enforcement Protection Act of 1986.

In a letter to ATF Director B. Todd Jones, Cochran maintained the ammunition should continue to be classified as “primarily intended for sporting purposes.”

“It is my understanding that this common and widely available ammunition has been exempt from federal regulation related to armor piercing ammunition for almost 30 years,” Cochran said.

“I am concerned this proposed framework will supersede the will of Congress reflected through a statute that has proven effective in ensuring safe recreational application, and it will harm law-abiding gun owners and ammunition manufacturers.”

Cochran warned that the reclassification “sets a precedent that could lead to unnecessary regulation of almost all other classifications of ammunition.” The Senator said the prosed ATF framework disregards the “sporting purposes” exemption established in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C) of the Law Enforcement Protection Act of 1986.

“In fact, this ammunition is used almost exclusively for sporting purposes. I strongly encourage you to revisit this interpretation and reconsider the vast implications that this may have on law-abiding gun owners and the American firearms industry,” Cochran wrote.

Wyoming --(Ammoland.com)- The House version of HB-114 Repeal Gun Free Zones that passed in the House 42-17 has been tossed out, and the Senate Education Committee ‘substituted’ a counterfeit bill in its place.

In an unprecedented bypassing of parliamentary rule, a simple three page pro-gun bill was exchanged for fourteen pages of gun control.

Going forward WyGO will afford you several opportunities to be involved in changing the anti-gun environment in the Capitol.

The good news is, we now have over three years of recorded votes and actions by Senators who treat your right to keep and bear arms with deliberate contempt.

The fact that we have a recorded history of the Senate is something you can be proud of. This in itself was made possible only because of your support and dedicated activism.

So please take a moment to relish this fact…we have real political-ammo to bring the fight to the anti-gun politicians.

With your help, I intend to use various media strategies to expose the bad apples. And I’m not looking to just upset the apple cart, instead I want to send them to the compost heap!

Please consider helping out by contributing today.

By using direct mail, google ads, facebook ads, radio ads and even voter-district targeted gun giveaways, the bad actors just won’t be able to hide the ‘truth’ from their constituents anymore.

Remember, they are running the Colorado blueprint to change Wyoming’s political landscape.

And now that the current Senate failed a final chance to do the right thing. It’s now time for us to get busy with effective activism.

For Liberty,

Anthony Bouchard Executive Director Wyoming Gun Owners

Wyoming Gun Owners is a not-for-profit issue advocacy organization that is on a deliberate mission to protect and defend the Second Amendment. Contributions to WyGO are unlimited and are used to expose politicians who treat your rights with contempt. Contributions to WyGO are not deductible as charitable contributions for tax purposes.

About:
Wyoming Gun Owners is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, single-purpose citizens’ organization dedicated to preserving and protecting the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as guaranteed by Article 1 Section 24 of the Wyoming Constitution and the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Wyoming Gun Owners is the only organization taking action at this level–with an aggressive program designed to mobilize public support for pro-gun legislation as well as opposition to gun control. www.wyominggunowners.org

West Virginia --(Ammoland.com)-There is a full-on media blitz against your rights.

In case you haven’t noticed it, nearly every media outlet in the state is running biased, and often outright false stories attacking constitutional carry. Most of them are not even making an effort at truth.

Further, we are hearing reports of robo-calls being made to citizens statewide urging calls in opposition to your rights. We do not know for sure where these are coming from, but Mike Bloomberg is a reasonable guess.

Multiple senators stand ready with amendments to the bill designed to limit the exercise of your rights.

Every West Virginian that believes in the right to bear arms needs to call their representatives in the Senate, and urge them to pass SB347 without amendment. You need to do this today. The vote is tomorrow morning.

Share this message with every gun owner you know. Ask them to stand up for their rights by making a call and sending an email.

About:
The West Virginia Citizens Defense League (WVCDL) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, all-volunteer, grassroots organization of concerned West Virginians who support our individual right to keep and bear arms for defense of self, family, home and state, and for lawful hunting and recreational use, as protected by the state constitution and the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. Visit: www.wvcdl.org

Grove City, PA --(Ammoland.com)- Speaking at the National Prayer Breakfast on February 5 2015, President Barack Obama cautioned against judging recent barbaric attacks by ISIS as unique to Islam. He pointed to (among other things) depredations committed by Crusaders over 900 years ago.

Despite the blundering butchery by semi-barbarous European feudal armies, the medieval Crusades made strategic sense. After the fall of the Roman Empire and Western Europe’s descent into the Dark Ages, the Christian Byzantine Empire formed a protective shield against Muslim incursions into the Balkans and westward. In 1095, after Seljuk Turks overran much of the Byzantine Empire and occupied Christian holy sites in Jerusalem, Pope Urban II’s call for Crusades proved a historic turning point.

The day after Obama’s prayer breakfast lecture his national security advisor, Susan Rice, speaking at the Brookings Institute, previewed the White House’s 2015 National Security Policy by calling for “perspective” in addressing “dangerous … numerous and varied” threats which, according to her, “are not of an existential nature.” She then incorrectly cited World War II as one of the existential threats to the United States before correctly noting the Cold War presented such a threat.

America at arms excels in crusades fought to a definitive conclusion. There have been several such “crusades” in American history and three existential threats.

The fight for independence from Britain constituted a struggle for existence that, had the patriots lost, would have aborted the American republic. After a long, hard struggle the patriots prevailed; failure would have meant the gallows. From the patriots’ perspective theirs was a war for survival against formidable odds fought to a definitive conclusion. While not a “crusade,” it was a desperate fight. For the British, not so much—and they lost.

The American Civil War posed an existential threat not because the Confederacy wanted to conquer the Union but because its success would have destroyed the Union. It was a closely run thing but in the end, the Union embarked on a two-edged crusade to preserve the Union and abolish slavery. The “Battle Hymn of the Republic” says a lot about President Abraham Lincoln’s determination and Washington’s war aims. While Gen. Ulysses S. Grant destroyed Confederate armies, Gen. William T. Sherman undertook offensives in Alabama and Georgia that sacked farms and destroyed industries to collapse the South’s already weak economy. The Union crusade preserved the United States of America.

The Second World War, too, was an American crusade although Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, and Italy never posed an existential threat to the United States. Japan sought to compel the United States to withdraw from the western Pacific. While a victorious Nazi Germany would have imposed a barbaric new “Dark Age” on Europe, in the 1940s the Nazis could not threaten the existence of the United States. Nevertheless, President Franklin D. Roosevelt mounted a crusade to save civilization that the American military pursued to a definitive conclusion. Japan and the European fascist powers suffered the same fate as the Confederacy: defeated armies, wrecked economies, devastated cities, disestablished political systems, and their countries occupied during political reconstruction.

The Cold War, however, posed an existential threat. Marxist ideology fostered a showdown between two incompatible socio-economic systems. The Cold War mobilized America’s industrial, scientific and academic communities. Although the nation was drawn into two indecisive conflicts in Korea and Vietnam, the overarching Cold War paradigm involved a struggle between antithetical systems only one of which could survive. In the end, the genius of President Ronald Reagan was to label the Soviet Union an “Evil Empire” and undertake the largest peacetime military buildup in American history coupled with his strategic defense initiative—“Star Wars.” The overregulated and inept Soviet economy collapsed along with its ideologically bankrupted Marxist political system. Although Russia survived and will challenge the West again, because of Ronald Reagan millions of East Europeans were freed from political servitude. A crusading America makes for an awesome adversary.

The Obama administration’s refusal to recognize the existential nature of the threat posed by Islamic fanaticism does not make that threat less real. Given their apocalyptic vision, if al Qaeda’s rapidly metastasizing franchises obtain weapons of mass destruction they will use them. ISIS computer specialists demonstrated remarkable information age capabilities in their 22-minute Internet presentation culminating in the live immolation of Jordanian Air Force Lt. Moaz al Kasasbeh. The nature of cyber warfare is that savvy hackers can wreak catastrophic damage. This existential threat is real. Given the fanatical commitment driving this threat, efforts to “decimate and contain” will fail.

What’s needed is an American-led crusade to attack and annihilate al Qaeda and its ISIS franchise.

— Dr. Earl Tilford is a military historian and fellow for the Middle East & terrorism with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He currently lives in Tuscaloosa, Alabama where he is writing a history of the University of Alabama in the 1960s. A retired Air Force intelligence officer, Dr. Tilford earned his PhD in American and European military history at George Washington University. From 1993 to 2001, he served as Director of Research at the U.S. Army’s Strategic Studies Institute. In 2001, he left Government service for a professorship at Grove City College, where he taught courses in military history, national security, and international and domestic terrorism and counter-terrorism.

]]>http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/american-crusades-and-existential-threats/feed/1Dog Owner’s Lack of Care Results in Violent Death for Two Dogshttp://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/dog-owners-lack-of-care-results-in-violent-death-for-two-dogs/
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/dog-owners-lack-of-care-results-in-violent-death-for-two-dogs/#commentsFri, 27 Feb 2015 17:32:20 +0000http://www.ammoland.com/?p=195918By Dean WeingartenDog Owner’s Lack of Care Results in Violent Death for Two DogsDean Weingarten

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Animal owners are responsible for their animals and the actions of their animals.

Dogs are not people. It is much harder for them to understand property lines and property rights. They have to be taught, and often, restrained. When dogs run free of their owners control, their instincts tend to take over, especially if there are more than one of them.

Their instinct pushes them to bark at other animals, chase them, bite them, kill them, and eat them. If there is more than one dog, pack instinct kicks in and they bounce off of one another’s behavior like little boys playing “I dare you”; with all their instincts pushing them toward making the kill.

This is why virtually all states have laws that allow owners of livestock to protect their animals from the attacks of free roaming dogs. It is the responsibility of the dog owner to restrain their dog or dogs, and it is their fault if they allow their animals to run free where they become a danger to other animals. Dogs act differently away from their owners than they do with their owners.

In Texas, someone was not responsible enough to restrain their dogs. It is reported that they were running loose and attacked Mr. Conatser’s calf, in his barn. Mr. Conatser showed remarkable restraint. He did not kill the dogs. He went to considerable trouble to contact the dog owner and to warn them of horrible consequences to their dogs, if the owner did not do as his responsibility required.

Mr. Conatser’s warnings went unheeded. He was forced to shoot two dogs. Dogs that were likely fine pets, when they were around their owner and under their control. But the owner failed in his responsibility to his animals, and now they are dead.

Mr. Conatser could not wait for a third or fourth time to intercept the dogs. very likely his calf would have been dead by then. He did what he had to do. A hard thing, forced on him by the irresponsible act of another.

I feel for him.

Mr. Conatser made a mistake. He posted a picture of the dead dogs on Facebook, no doubt out of frustration and anger that an uncaring person had forced this deed on him. It is clear that he did not want to kill the dogs, or he would have done so the first time they attacked his calf.

Mr Conatser is not the one at fault. The person responsible is the one who failed to restrain their dogs.

Family friend Kevin Forester said Conatser found the dogs inside his barn a couple of days earlier, while they were attacking his calf, and recognized them as belonging to his neighbor.

“So he went over to his neighbor’s and told him that his dogs was getting in his barn and attacking his animals, to please ya know keep ‘em at home, put ‘em on a leash, build a fence, do something,” recalled Forester.

The friend says Conatser told him the neighbor didn’t care. We left messages with neighbors in the area, but haven’t heard back.

Sec. 822.013. DOGS OR COYOTES THAT ATTACK ANIMALS. (a) A dog or coyote that is attacking, is about to attack, or has recently attacked livestock, domestic animals, or fowls may be killed by:

(1) any person witnessing the attack; or

(2) the attacked animal’s owner or a person acting on behalf of the owner if the owner or person has knowledge of the attack.

(b) A person who kills a dog or coyote as provided by this section is not liable for damages to the owner, keeper, or person in control of the dog or coyote.

Dog owners, remember that you are responsible for your animals and their welfare. They depend on you. I am a dog person. I love and understand dogs. It saddens me when irresponsible owners cause unneeded harm to the animals that depend on them.

Most people understand this and feel sympathy for Mr. Conatser. But some cannot consider anything more than that Mr. Conatser shot dogs. The volunteer fire department that Mr. Conatser belongs to has received a lot of emails. Five out of six are supportive. But one in six is not. Mr. Conatser has received death threats from as far as Europe. Conatser has temporarily withdrawn from the rotation, because of the threats.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

FAIRFAX, Va. -- (Ammoland.com)- NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre will be speaking live from CPAC today (February 27, 2015) at 1:20 p.m. ET/12:20 p.m. CT, and you can watch it right here on AmmoLand.com

Place – Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C.Transcript – A full transcript of Wayne’s speech will be available on www.NRA.org as soon as the speech concludes.NRA Streaming Locations – You can view the speech LIVE here on AmmoLand, or tune in to: www.NRA.org, www.NRANews.com, www.NRALifeofDuty.tv, www.NRAWomen.tv, www.NRAFreestyle.tv, www.Facebook.com/NationalRifleAssociation and www.Facebook.com/NRANews.

The NRA will also be tweeting live during the speech @NRANews.

About:
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen’s group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and to advocate enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation’s leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit: www.nra.org

]]>http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/today-wayne-lapierre-speaking-from-cpac-live-feed-on-ammoland-com/feed/0Will Obama be Forced to Swallow a Repeal of the AR-15 Ammo Ban?http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/will-obama-be-forced-to-swallow-a-repeal-of-the-ar-15-ammo-ban/
http://www.ammoland.com/2015/02/will-obama-be-forced-to-swallow-a-repeal-of-the-ar-15-ammo-ban/#commentsFri, 27 Feb 2015 15:02:00 +0000http://www.ammoland.com/?p=195863Will Obama be Forced to Swallow a Repeal of the AR-15 Ammo Ban?Gun Owners of America

Washington, DC --(Ammoland.com)- ACTION: Click here to contact your Senators and Represenatative and urge them to support a repeal of ATF’s AR-15 ban.

And tell them to vote against the DHS funding bill — specifically, urging your Senators to vote against any cloture motion that would facilitate it.

ATF’s Ban on common AR-15 ammo

The ban is completely lawless and unconstitutional, and there are legislators who want to fight the ban.

At least one Republican office is considering an amendment to block Obama’s illegal AR-15 ammunition ban by attaching it to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill.

But if you’ve been watching the news, you know that there is a royal battle right now over this bill because of Obama’s Executive Amnesty, something that GOA has reported on before.

Executive Amnesty Threatens Gun Owners’ Rights

To provide some context, Barack Obama initiated the controversy by unconstitutionally and unlawfully using “executive action” to give amnesty to 5,000,000 people illegally in this country.

How do we know it’s illegal? Because Barack Obama himself had said repeatedly that it would be illegal, and now a federal court has said the same.

And, to give you a sense of what stake the Second Amendment community has in this battle, we will quote liberal anti-gun Oregon Democratic Congressman Kurt Schrader, who confidently opined that this fight “will decide who is in charge of this country for the next 20 or 30 years.”

In other words, if you add another 5-8,000,000 anti-gun voters to the rolls, we can kiss the Second Amendment good-bye.

But, to get back to our story, Obama “decreed” an amnesty last year which he himself had pronounced unlawful.

And his primary (unspoken) defense was that the Police Chief (Eric Holder) worked for him and the newly-packed federal courts would, generally, do what he told them to do.

In December, Republicans had their best chance to defeat Obama’s Executive Amnesty. But as many of you will remember, House Speaker John Boehner caved and said that Republicans would fight the battle in February.

Well, we warned Republicans in December that the fight to kill the anti-gun amnesty would be a lot harder if they put it off until February (this week).

After all, we know that if Republicans send Obama a DHS funding bill with NO monies for amnesty, that the President will veto it. And this, of course, means that the Department of Homeland Security sends all non-essential employees home.

How does that help the cause, knowing that in order to defeat amnesty, we’re refusing to pay our border agents? We simply chop off our nose to spite our face.

McConnell Surrenders and Retreats

Making the best out of a less than ideal situation, the House of Representatives has now used its “power of the purse” to do one simple and obvious thing: The House-passed appropriations (money) bill funded all of America’s security operations, with the sole exception of Obama’s admittedly unconstitutional amnesty. And it sent the bill to the Senate.

Enter Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Reid has been whining about Republican filibusters for the last six years. But, now that the shoe is on the other foot, Reid has no problem with blocking the Senate from even proceeding to the bill.

And this was the case even though Republicans were prepared to allow Reid to offer amendments — a courtesy Reid never gave Republicans when he was in charge.

And, incidentally, even though it is Reid who is filibustering, a “lap-dog” press has no problem paradoxically blaming the GOP for holding up the bill.

So McConnell surrendered. His “compromise” would send Barack Obama a “clean” appropriations bill which fully funds Obama’s illegal amnesty. Sure, he has a “sham” companion bill, but that bill will be vetoed and the veto sustained.

Furthermore, in order to avoid forcing Democrats to vote on “uncomfortable” issues, McConnell is offering to use a parliamentary tool to shut out all pro-gun amendments.

Why is this important? It’s important because at least one Republican office is considering an amendment to block Obama’s illegal AR-15 ammunition ban. McConnell’s “compromise” would prevent this amendment from being offered.

So, now that McConnell is lying on the floor (metaphorically) and allowing Obama to kick him in the face, Reid should be satisfied, right?

Wrong.

Harry Reid has just announced that he won’t accept McConnell’s surrender until House Speaker John Boehner surrenders as well.

About:Gun Owners of America (GOA) is a non-profit lobbying organization formed in 1975 to preserve and defend the Second Amendment rights of gun owners. GOA sees firearms ownership as a freedom issue. `The only no comprise gun lobby in Washington’ – Ron Paul Visit: www.gunowners.org to Join.

USA - -(Ammoland.com)- If the sadists of ISIS are seeking — with their mass executions, child rapes, immolations, and beheadings of Christians — to stampede us into a new war in the Middle East, they are succeeding.

Repeatedly snapping the blood-red cape of terrorist atrocities in our faces has the Yankee bull snorting, pawing the ground, ready to charge again.

“Nearly three-quarters of Republicans now favor sending ground troops into combat against the Islamic State,” says a CBS News poll. The poll was cited in a New York Times story about how the voice of the hawk is ascendant again in the GOP.

In April or May 2015, said a Pentagon briefer last week, the Iraqi Army will march north to recapture Mosul from the Islamic State.

On to Mosul! On to Raqqa!

Yet, who, exactly, will be taking Mosul?

According to Rowan Scarborough of The Washington Times, the U.S. general who trained the Iraqi army says Mosul is a mined, booby-trapped city, infested with thousands of suicide fighters.

Any Iraqi army attack this spring would be “doomed.”

Translation: Either U.S. troops lead, or Mosul remains in ISIS’ hands.

Yet taking Mosul is only the beginning. Scores of thousands of troops will be needed to defeat and destroy ISIS in Syria.

And eradicating ISIS is but the first of the wars Republicans have in mind. This coming week, at the invitation of Speaker John Boehner, Bibi Netanyahu will address a joint session of Congress.

His message: Obama and John Kerry are bringing back a rotten deal that will ensure Iran acquires nuclear weapons and becomes an existential threat to Israel. Congress must repudiate Obama’s deal, impose new sanctions on Iran and terminate the appeasement talks.

Should Bibi and his Republican allies succeed in closing the ramp to a diplomatic solution, we will be on the road to war.

Which is where Bibi wants us.

To him, Iran is the Nazi Germany of the 21st century, hell-bent on a new Holocaust. A U.S. war that does to the Ayatollah’s Iran what a U.S. war did to Hitler’s Germany would put Bibi in the history books as the Israeli Churchill.

But if Republicans scuttle the Iranian negotiations by voting new sanctions, Iran will take back the concessions it has made, and we are indeed headed for war. Which is where Sen. Lindsey Graham, too, now toying with a presidential bid, wants us to be.

In 2010, Sen. Graham declared: “Instead of a surgical strike on [Iran’s] nuclear infrastructure … we’re to the point now that you have to really neuter the regime’s ability to wage war against us and our allies. … [We must] destroy the ability of the regime to strike back.”

If Congress scuttles the nuclear talks, look for Congress to next write an authorization for the use of military force — on Iran.

Today, the entire Shiite Crescent — Iran, Iraq, Bashar Assad’s Syria, Hezbollah — is fighting ISIS. All these Shiites are de facto allies in any war against ISIS. But should we attack Iran, they will become enemies.

And what would war with Iran mean for U.S. interests?

With its anti-ship missiles and hundreds of missile boats, Iran could imperil our fleet in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea. The Gulf could be closed to commercial shipping by a sinking or two.

Hezbollah could go after the U.S. embassy in Beirut. The Green Zone in Baghdad could come under attack by Shiite militia loyal to Iran.

Would Assad’s army join Iran’s fight against America?

It surely would if America listened to those Republicans who now say we must bring down Assad to convince Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arabs to join the fight against ISIS.

By clashing with Iran, we would make enemies of Damascus and Baghdad and the Shiite militias in Iraq and Beirut battling ISIS today — in the hope that, tomorrow, the conscientious objectors of the Sunni world — Turks, Saudis, Gulf Arabs — might come and fight beside us.

Listen for long to GOP foreign policy voices, and you can hear calls for war on ISIS, al-Qaida, Boko Haram, the Houthi rebels, the Assad regime, the Islamic Republic of Iran, to name but a few.

Are we to fight them all? How many U.S. troops will be needed? How long will all these wars take? What will the Middle East look like after we crush them all? Who will fill the vacuum if we go? Or must we stay forever?

Nor does this exhaust the GOP war menu.

Enraged by Vladimir Putin’s defiance, Republicans are calling for U.S. weapons, trainers, even troops, to be sent to Ukraine and Moldova.

Says John Bolton, himself looking at a presidential run, “Most of the Republican candidates or prospective candidates are heading in the right direction; there’s one who’s headed in the wrong direction.”

SACRAMENTO, CA —-(Ammoland.com)- In response to a federal district court decision released today on the constitutionality of the State of California’s “Unsafe Handgun Act” handgun roster and microstamping laws, The Calguns Foundation released the following statement:

“We are disappointed that the district court sidestepped a clear violation of Second Amendment civil rights in its decision today. However, we are absolutely committed to litigating this case as far as necessary to reverse this incorrect ruling and restore the right to keep and bear modern handguns in the Golden State.

It is difficult to understand how the Supreme Court’s landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision could be so badly mis-applied. Laws that ban law-abiding people from acquiring virtually all modern handguns following a rigorous background check have no constitutional basis and must be overturned.

It is utterly preposterous that a Federal Court would rule that a ban on all new semi-automatic handguns does not burden Second Amendment rights. Such a decision conflicts with Ninth Circuit precedent, much less the Supreme Court’s holdings in Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.

Our counsel have already appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and will take every action necessary to create a successful outcome there.”

The Calguns Foundation (www.calgunsfoundation.org) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that serves its members, supporters, and the public through educational, cultural, and judicial efforts to advance Second Amendment and related civil rights.

Fairfax, VA --(Ammoland.com)- Last week, an anti-gun bill known as the Firearm Registration Act, or House Bill 503, was introduced in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives by anti-gun state Representative Angel Cruz (D-12).

Says Representative Angel Cruz “In the near future, I plan to re-introduce my legislation which would create the Firearms Registration Act to require all firearms in the Commonwealth to be registered with the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP).”

“Under my proposal, owners of registered firearms will be given a valid registration certificate for each registered firearm which will be valid for only one year. A registration certificate will only be issued to individuals who have never been convicted of a crime of violence, never been convicted of a crime relating to the use, possession, or sale of any dangerous drug within five years prior to the application, and is not otherwise ineligible to possess a firearm under any Federal or State law. This PSP database will aid all law enforcement officials across the state with investigations such as tracking missing or stolen firearms.”

HB 503 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, and your NRA-ILA will keep you updated if this bill sees any movement.

As always, NRA-ILA stands opposed to any and all firearm registration schemes and will stand guard against any infringement on your Second Amendment rights in the Keystone State.

About:
Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the “lobbying” arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Visit: www.nra.org

Arizona - -(Ammoland.com)- Back in 1976, when there was no Internet, the fairness doctrine muzzled free speech, and the Media was celebrating their power to overthrow a President, Wisconsin passed a requirement that people purchasing handguns from federally licensed dealers had to wait 48 hours to take possession of them.

“Waiting periods” were another trendy law called for by a media culture intent on banning handgun possession from the public. There had been waiting periods in California for a number of years. The law was based on a dubious theory that I call the “Progressive Elite” theory of homicide. The idea is, that a person, in a fit of rage, would buy a handgun to commit murder. The waiting period was supposed to give a person time to “cool off” before they did the evil deed.

It never really made any sense. The idea that someone, in an emotional fit, would go to a gun store, purchase a handgun, then go and commit murder with it was simply a fantasy. If a violent person is in an emotional rage, they use whatever is at hand. The vast majority of murderers already have criminal records, and are not allowed to buy guns from federal dealers. The law did not slow down anyone from buying a rifle or a shotgun. It is preposterous to believe that someone intent on murder would pass up a cheaper rifle or shotgun if a handgun were denied them.

To add insult to anyone with common sense, the law made no differentiation between someone who already had a gun, and someone who did not. What is the point of denying a gun from someone, for 48 hours, when they already own a gun safe full of them? A federal court has acknowledged this. California’s extreme waiting period, which had crept from overnight to 15 days, and was belatedly reduced to “merely” 10 days, was struck down as unconstitutional for people who already own guns. The judge in the case noted that there is no evidence that “waiting periods” had any benefit for people who already own firearms.

John Lott studied the effect of waiting periods. He did not find any reduction in crime rates associated with them (page 20, More Guns Less Crime, Third Edition).

The real effect of waiting periods is to make it harder for ordinary people to exercise their rights. It is a clear infringement to delay the exercise of a right. I suffered under the insane 15 day waiting period in California. Handgun purchases became much more difficult. I was working as a military game warden as an extra duty, and was a commissioned officer in the U.S. Army. I found a rare and desirable handgun in a shop 80 miles away (Colt Python 6 inch). I had pay for the handgun. Then I had to wait two weeks; then make the 160 mile round trip to pick up the firearm. The real effect of the law was to make it hard for people to exercise their rights, and to chill the exercise of the second amendment. I suspect that was the real intent.

The Wisconsin legislature has taken notice of the futility and costs of the silly waiting period law. They probably noticed the federal court ruling in California. A bill, AB49, has been introduced to eliminate the counterproductive waiting period. The bill has wide support, with 32 co-sponsors in the Assembly. A list of people on the committee that will be hearing the bill on February 26th, with contact information, is available at the armedbadger.com.

Current law provides that a federally licensed firearms dealer must request the Department of Justice (DOJ) to conduct a background check of a prospective purchaser before the dealer may transfer a handgun after a sale. Current law also requires the firearms dealer to wait 48 hours after receiving notice that DOJ received the request for a background check, without receiving notice that state or federal law prohibits the purchaser from possessing a firearm, before transferringthe handgun to the purchaser. This bill eliminates the 48-hour waiting period. Under this bill, the dealer may transfer the handgun immediately after receiving notice from DOJ that the background check indicates that the purchaser is not prohibited from possessing a firearm.

There are 99 seats in the Wisconsin Assembly. I counted 36 Democrat members of the Assembly. There are to 33 Senate senators. 14 of the 33 are Democrats, 19 are Republicans. A Republican was elected to fill a vacancy in February of 2015.

c2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch

About Dean Weingarten;

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

According to San Diego Jewish World, the act is meant to stop a “known or suspected terrorist from buying firearms or explosives.” Yet as Feinstein, one of the bill’s central sponsors explained, the terrorists who would be barred from buying firearms are also barred from traveling to the United States in the first place — so why give the AG new powers over gun sales for people who are banned from even entering the USA?

Here’s how Feinstein put it:

The Kouachi brothers, responsible for the attacks in Paris, were on U.S. terrorist watch lists, including the no-fly list. However, if the brother had instead been in the United States, they would have been able to legally purchase weapons.

Of course, the brothers were not present in the United States — and of course, they were banned from boarding a plan to get here.

Nonetheless, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorist Act of 2015 would give the AG new powers, allowing him to “deny the purchase or transfer of a firearm or explosive to a known or suspected terrorist if the perspective recipient may use the firearm or explosive in connection with terrorism.”

There are questions regarding what the measure for ascertaining a “suspected terrorist” for the purposes of banning gun sales will be, but none regarding the fact that the bill gives AG Holder the final say on who gets a gun and that can not be good for anyone.